Chaos(SHC) vs Pelton-T131- Game Over-Soviet victory.

[chaos45]

T38 moscow- some back and forth attacks

[chaos45]

T38 south his counterattack that wipes out a guards army. As after a brutal winter the Germans easily recover and manage to drive their trucks rapidly over snow covered plains to encircle the army as it tries to flee to my fortified lines.

[chaos45]

T38 south my lines drop back to my fortified positions.

[chaos45]

Going to say I dont buy the Germans completely and total ability to resume the offensive in March on of 1942. I personally feel its a failure of the game engine once more. Historically speaking the German was in no condition in March 1942 to do anything other than restore the lines and slowly fix the breaches caused by the Soviets all winter.

Ive already pointed out how much favoritism the game is giving the Germans over historical in terms of manpower and limiting the growth of the Soviet Army. Overall for the first year of the war somehow the German army in every single game is managing to grow about 500k men over historical even when taking close to historical losses....while the Soviet army is being shorted around 2 million men compared to their historical recruitment. This is whats allowing the Germans to resume complete and total offensive operations in March 1942.

Now could the game be balanced around a 500k smaller German army and 2M more soviets- with the current system I doubt it, but I think 500k fewer Germans would go a long way towards stopping these massive, basically unlimited offensive operations in 1942....as the Germans would have to be weak somewhere to get the force concentrations they are pulling off currently. Right now effectively the Germans can stay relatively strong along most of the line even with no armor support- this frankly is BS.

As per the manpower threads- I did the research the game is only giving 300K-400k or so men for the luftwaffe units depending on start dates. So not a valid explanation for the 4M man German army we are seeing in the game.

[M60A3TTS]

The Soviets really don't need more manpower. You will normally raise 12-14m if you play through to the end. Now we'll have to see how much more casualties the next version creates.

The Germans having the extra manpower is a reflection of the not so bloody CRT in the present config.

[chaos45]

Need or not isnt the issue- its a fact the Soviets put 2M more men under arms in the first year of the war over what the game is giving the Soviet player. So in effect the game is shorting the Soviet player 2M men in the first 12 months of the war, and the armaments to put them in the field as the Soviet industry in the game is nowhere near capable of putting an additional 2M men in the Soviet OOB in the first 12 months.

If the Germans were shorted 2M men instead of having an additional 500k my guess is people would be complaining lol.

Lets be honest despite what Pelton believes the real war was like- the Germans did better than all exceptions to achieve what they did in the real war. So in all reality a good German player should achieve about historical results- German high command never believed they could achieve their strategic objectives in 1941. In fact the initial briefings and recommendations were to capture Leningrad and halt around Kiev/Smolensk in order to build better logistics support for a 1942 campaign to win the war. The Germans knew that past those points they couldnt sustain logistical operations in 1941.

[chaos45]

T40 North he tries to push around the lake still. leningrad slowly falling.

[chaos45]

T40 center Soviet forces take more ground to the west of moscow.

[chaos45]

T40 South- He makes a massive push to encircle voroznevh- a Massive soviet counterattack pushes back the encirclement some and if this was real life would have inflicted unsustainable losses on the Germans but instead its a pinprick- throwing back 8 German panzer/motorized divisions through several Zocs in several hexes of retreat- nets a grand total of like 5K German losses- what a joke.

[chaos45]

T41- not much change- north/center- a few hexes change hands he gets a couple in the north I get several in the center- massive fighting continues in the south as I manage to keep the pocket open- Again pushing German combat/motorized units back through several overstacks and zocs = not enough losses overall. His armor is completely fine even after being heavily defeated several turns in a row now by my shock armies.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: chaos45

T41- not much change- north/center- a few hexes change hands he gets a couple in the north I get several in the center- massive fighting continues in the south as I manage to keep the pocket open- Again pushing German combat/motorized units back through several overstacks and zocs = not enough losses overall. His armor is completely fine even after being heavily defeated several turns in a row now by my shock armies.

I realise you are frustrated with the combat model but it is what it is. I strongly suspect that Peltons armour is not *completely fine*, you're doing an excellent job on turning his pacman tactics on him. This'll probably be your last turn before the mud starts to set in, so worth a serious think about if you are going to stand or try to pull him eastwards in the summer?

remember the 40 morale will really bite hard.

[HITMAN202]

chaos, I think the combat engine is too soft with casualties, but competent leaders are not going to throw their units pell-mell into a costly attack.

I see it as historical for 2 major armored forces to class in open terrain and not bleed to death, as you seem to imply that they should. A German Corp commander could stop a major attack (a Held result) before massive losses and similarly a Soviet army pull back (retreat) after minimal fighting. To demand, as the supreme commander, for a unit to attack at all costs or defend to the last man is one thing; getting them to do it is another and IMO seems ahistorical.

[chaos45]

Ohh he chews me up later on- thus my comments about the never ending German offensive in 1942 lol.

As to casualties- is a massive glaring problem in the system- game has been out for how long now and it was never fixed----pretty sure I made a comment on how poorly done the combat model was at least 2 years ago.

Seen higher losses in games of tactical battles by far than corps sized engagements in this game lol.

This issue is whats leading to the German armor being unstoppable----as you can never kill enough of them unless you encircle them----which historically the Panzer divisions just got ground down. You dont see that in this game at all. It takes a ton of effort to orchestrate a successful soviet counterattack to partially stop the panzer ball, but due to how crappy the combat engine is, all it does is burn your operational surprise and the panzers just immediately turn the table next turn because you never inflict enough losses to matter.

A couple pictures dont explain the situation and how low the losses are in the game- he is attacking with almost every panzer/motorized Division in the German army minus maybe 1-2 corps, as well as several full stacks of German infantry repeatedly over these turns. My counterattack was with 4 entire full 20-21 CP shock armies an additional entire front of infantry armies and about half of another fronts infantry. In a real engagement of this scale the losses should be very high especially with all of the attacking/counterattacking going on, and you dont see it. Instead on his turn he does a ton of hasty attacks pushing back like an army of infantry for the low loss of like 5K per side maybe...then on my turn I launch 3+ massive attacks against stacks of armor 2-3 divisions per stack to re-open the pocket and several additional flanking attacks as the picture shows- end result even pushing germans back thru several overstacked and zoc'd hexes is 5k or so losses.

If it was like 50k losses hey im cool with that and due to the forces involved thats still maybe just 10% losses makes sense. I mean each shock army alone is throwing 75-100k men into this battle...so your talking at a minimum the battle involved almost half a million Soviet troops from various fronts/armies. Against this I was facing a total 30+ German divisions again about half a million men....and then for each side to only lose like a weak division or so each turn......Realistic it isnt.

The fight goes on, but it is extremely frustrating to watch Soviet units wiped from the board turn after turn due to encirclement being the only way in the game to get real losses and then when the Soviets can organize a successful counteroffensive it does basically no damage to the German war effort other than a slight delay in the time table of their next encirclement. If the Germans had it so easy in the real war they would have won. Look at operation winter garden for the relief of stalingrad were those German divisions encircled...nope but by the end of the operation they were all practically combat ineffective from the losses they took trying to break through, and that wasnt a very long operation by WiTE game terms-----in real life divisions could and did suffer massive losses in normal combat operations not just encirclement operations. 1 week is more than enough time to destroy pretty much any division in WW2 combat especially on the eastern front. Simple fact is most divisions didnt attack/get attacked every week- corps took time to plan operations gather supplies and then launch the assault. Then if it wasnt as super success/breakthrough you had to replace all the dead wounded- rebuild the division in the line or be pulled out to rebuild before you could try it again. A failed attack by a division in WW2 was a bad thing typically as Armys have policies and when you are ordered to do something you do it- believe US standard is 20% losses is acceptable to accomplish a mission.....so if an attack fails you should figure the unit had better have suffered 20%+ losses in men/equipment otherwise the General is probably getting fired for not trying hard enough. An Generals usually dont like to get fired, they like their pension plans lol.

Again I think some people lack the concept of what this scale of game is. Its divisional/corps level operations- when a division/corps is defeated in combat its not a bad day of combat its a bad week of combat, I still say from watching the combat reports some that combat model is only representing a couple hours to a day of actual combat and that is inherently the issue with the system. The turns are 1 week turns not one day turns.

A WW2 division locked in heavy combat can easily lose a battalion or more in men per day of assault/defensive operations. Even Allied- US/English divisions had this happen. There are numerous instances of entire battalions/regiments ceasing to exist in 1 day of heavy combat. WW2 combat is an extremely lethal battlefield, more lethal than even modern operations for the most part because its full kinetic operations every single day. You want real war casualties I think you will have to double or triple the combat losses in the current game for germans and then probably double that again for early war Soviets. Of course if you make Soviet losses realistic u then also have to add in the 2M missing men from their OOB.

Almost every single US division locked in combat for a year or close to it suffered 100%+ losses over that time frame- and US units typically lost many fewer men than Soviet/German units. That should give a frame for how heavy losses should be on the eastern front.

Hey an this is all just my opinion lol. From seeing some screen of war in the west it looks like that combat model is way better than WiTE as I saw some reports of 100k losses for each side for 1 week of operations- thats how WiTE should be pretty much every week when alot of offensive operations are going on. I know German players might cry foul if a division lost like 5k men in one attack/defense but thats how the real war was. Its why all the panzers couldnt just join up in one spot to run over Soviets, German infantry divisions could and did get extremely chewed up holding the frontline.

Just a quick historical example I pulled from a very quick search to back up my points:

In Krasny-Bor, the Spanish casualties were 3,645 from a total of 5,608 men involved in the battle. In addition, the enemy held more than 300 Spanish prisoners. This was a battle lasting 48 hours, not even 1 week like in this game. WW2 was much more lethal than people on this forum seem to realize. Those spanish were in heavily fortified positions supporting AGN in wooded terrain effectively if I remember right. Also before people go ohh spanish not Germans- this division had a fairly exception combat record for its service with the Germans and was trained and equipped to German standards.

In real life Generals didnt get 5 hasty attacks to get a good roll and succeed- if they failed the first time alot of their men probably died, which then made additional attacks less likely, not more likely to succeed.

[M60A3TTS]

updates

[MattFL]

The fight goes on, but it is extremely frustrating to watch Soviet units wiped from the board turn after turn due to encirclement being the only way in the game to get real losses and then when the Soviets can organize a successful counteroffensive it does basically no damage to the German war effort other than a slight delay in the time table of their next encirclement.

You really need to stop fighting 1942 Eastern Front and start fighting 2015 WiTE. At the close of '41 you had the advantage. Having just checked Pelton's recent screens, you're letting it slip away by trying to hold ground you don't need to hold. I agree in general that you want to keep the Germans as far west as possible to make your job in '43/'44 easier, but you have lots of ground to give. You need to let go of the '41 winter offensive mentality...it's over and it's time to keep your army alive. 4 more months of Barbarossa "blitzkrieg" and then the situation will forever change.....

[chaos45]

Mattp, IDK we shall see- I think so far his offensives have had alot more trouble than he thought- In those screens in the south what he doesnt tell is it took him 2-3 turns to lock the encirclement and he was losing until he shifted all his panzers to that battle. As he was trying to encircle me in the rostov area and fighting operations north of the big river there to. So by putting up a heavy fight I delayed his advance significantly and forced him to use all available panzer/motorized forces in one sector instead of two. The only unit that sucked to lose was my 1 guard cav corps and after a counterattack it couldnt scoot to safety was the issue- I counterattacked him very heavily [8D]

You will see is another massive encirclement battle several turns from now where I once more lose like 14 BDEs and 5-6 divisions--however again its takes him multiple turns to lock the encirclement and Im able to counterattack his panzers/motorized units alot. Buying more time...and getting more guards tank corps [8D]

Going to be out for the weekend but will update some screen of more recent turns from my side when I get back next week. Since he was trying to decide where to attack I was trying not to give away my rear defense positions but he ran into some of those roadblocks this last couple turns and they had the intended effect.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: chaos45

Ohh he chews me up later on- thus my comments about the never ending German offensive in 1942 lol.

As to casualties- is a massive glaring problem in the system- game has been out for how long now and it was never fixed----pretty sure I made a comment on how poorly done the combat model was at least 2 years ago.

Seen higher losses in games of tactical battles by far than corps sized engagements in this game lol.

This issue is whats leading to the German armor being unstoppable----as you can never kill enough of them unless you encircle them----which historically the Panzer divisions just got ground down. You dont see that in this game at all. It takes a ton of effort to orchestrate a successful soviet counterattack to partially stop the panzer ball, but due to how crappy the combat engine is, all it does is burn your operational surprise and the panzers just immediately turn the table next turn because you never inflict enough losses to matter.

A couple pictures dont explain the situation and how low the losses are in the game- he is attacking with almost every panzer/motorized Division in the German army minus maybe 1-2 corps, as well as several full stacks of German infantry repeatedly over these turns. My counterattack was with 4 entire full 20-21 CP shock armies an additional entire front of infantry armies and about half of another fronts infantry. In a real engagement of this scale the losses should be very high especially with all of the attacking/counterattacking going on, and you dont see it. Instead on his turn he does a ton of hasty attacks pushing back like an army of infantry for the low loss of like 5K per side maybe...then on my turn I launch 3+ massive attacks against stacks of armor 2-3 divisions per stack to re-open the pocket and several additional flanking attacks as the picture shows- end result even pushing germans back thru several overstacked and zoc'd hexes is 5k or so losses.

If it was like 50k losses hey im cool with that and due to the forces involved thats still maybe just 10% losses makes sense. I mean each shock army alone is throwing 75-100k men into this battle...so your talking at a minimum the battle involved almost half a million Soviet troops from various fronts/armies. Against this I was facing a total 30+ German divisions again about half a million men....and then for each side to only lose like a weak division or so each turn......Realistic it isnt.

The fight goes on, but it is extremely frustrating to watch Soviet units wiped from the board turn after turn due to encirclement being the only way in the game to get real losses and then when the Soviets can organize a successful counteroffensive it does basically no damage to the German war effort other than a slight delay in the time table of their next encirclement. If the Germans had it so easy in the real war they would have won. Look at operation winter garden for the relief of stalingrad were those German divisions encircled...nope but by the end of the operation they were all practically combat ineffective from the losses they took trying to break through, and that wasnt a very long operation by WiTE game terms-----in real life divisions could and did suffer massive losses in normal combat operations not just encirclement operations. 1 week is more than enough time to destroy pretty much any division in WW2 combat especially on the eastern front. Simple fact is most divisions didnt attack/get attacked every week- corps took time to plan operations gather supplies and then launch the assault. Then if it wasnt as super success/breakthrough you had to replace all the dead wounded- rebuild the division in the line or be pulled out to rebuild before you could try it again. A failed attack by a division in WW2 was a bad thing typically as Armys have policies and when you are ordered to do something you do it- believe US standard is 20% losses is acceptable to accomplish a mission.....so if an attack fails you should figure the unit had better have suffered 20%+ losses in men/equipment otherwise the General is probably getting fired for not trying hard enough. An Generals usually dont like to get fired, they like their pension plans lol.

Again I think some people lack the concept of what this scale of game is. Its divisional/corps level operations- when a division/corps is defeated in combat its not a bad day of combat its a bad week of combat, I still say from watching the combat reports some that combat model is only representing a couple hours to a day of actual combat and that is inherently the issue with the system. The turns are 1 week turns not one day turns.

A WW2 division locked in heavy combat can easily lose a battalion or more in men per day of assault/defensive operations. Even Allied- US/English divisions had this happen. There are numerous instances of entire battalions/regiments ceasing to exist in 1 day of heavy combat. WW2 combat is an extremely lethal battlefield, more lethal than even modern operations for the most part because its full kinetic operations every single day. You want real war casualties I think you will have to double or triple the combat losses in the current game for germans and then probably double that again for early war Soviets. Of course if you make Soviet losses realistic u then also have to add in the 2M missing men from their OOB.

Almost every single US division locked in combat for a year or close to it suffered 100%+ losses over that time frame- and US units typically lost many fewer men than Soviet/German units. That should give a frame for how heavy losses should be on the eastern front.

Hey an this is all just my opinion lol. From seeing some screen of war in the west it looks like that combat model is way better than WiTE as I saw some reports of 100k losses for each side for 1 week of operations- thats how WiTE should be pretty much every week when alot of offensive operations are going on. I know German players might cry foul if a division lost like 5k men in one attack/defense but thats how the real war was. Its why all the panzers couldnt just join up in one spot to run over Soviets, German infantry divisions could and did get extremely chewed up holding the frontline.

Just a quick historical example I pulled from a very quick search to back up my points:

In Krasny-Bor, the Spanish casualties were 3,645 from a total of 5,608 men involved in the battle. In addition, the enemy held more than 300 Spanish prisoners. This was a battle lasting 48 hours, not even 1 week like in this game. WW2 was much more lethal than people on this forum seem to realize. Those spanish were in heavily fortified positions supporting AGN in wooded terrain effectively if I remember right. Also before people go ohh spanish not Germans- this division had a fairly exception combat record for its service with the Germans and was trained and equipped to German standards.

In real life Generals didnt get 5 hasty attacks to get a good roll and succeed- if they failed the first time alot of their men probably died, which then made additional attacks less likely, not more likely to succeed.

Less whining and bitching would be more helpful.

All things being equal the game is balanced as you and BrianG are doing just fine and Dave going to get a draw dispite loses that were far worse then historical

This is a game not a book and balance should be based on equal player skills and the data from those games.

I still believe Russia is way over powered from 43-45.

Anything that nerfs Germany in 41 or 42 will put the game back to run away Russian offensives in summer of 42 that was a complete disaster. 85% of the strong following 2by3 had left and that was what killed WitW before release.

Players do not want Russia in Berlin in summer of 44 and a general across the front offensive in 42.

Look at the data of the games where the players are of equal skills and don't keep cherry picking historical.

You lost a few divsions its not the end of the world.

[Bob12]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: chaos45

Ohh he chews me up later on- thus my comments about the never ending German offensive in 1942 lol.

As to casualties- is a massive glaring problem in the system- game has been out for how long now and it was never fixed----pretty sure I made a comment on how poorly done the combat model was at least 2 years ago.

Seen higher losses in games of tactical battles by far than corps sized engagements in this game lol.

This issue is whats leading to the German armor being unstoppable----as you can never kill enough of them unless you encircle them----which historically the Panzer divisions just got ground down. You dont see that in this game at all. It takes a ton of effort to orchestrate a successful soviet counterattack to partially stop the panzer ball, but due to how crappy the combat engine is, all it does is burn your operational surprise and the panzers just immediately turn the table next turn because you never inflict enough losses to matter.

A couple pictures dont explain the situation and how low the losses are in the game- he is attacking with almost every panzer/motorized Division in the German army minus maybe 1-2 corps, as well as several full stacks of German infantry repeatedly over these turns. My counterattack was with 4 entire full 20-21 CP shock armies an additional entire front of infantry armies and about half of another fronts infantry. In a real engagement of this scale the losses should be very high especially with all of the attacking/counterattacking going on, and you dont see it. Instead on his turn he does a ton of hasty attacks pushing back like an army of infantry for the low loss of like 5K per side maybe...then on my turn I launch 3+ massive attacks against stacks of armor 2-3 divisions per stack to re-open the pocket and several additional flanking attacks as the picture shows- end result even pushing germans back thru several overstacked and zoc'd hexes is 5k or so losses.

If it was like 50k losses hey im cool with that and due to the forces involved thats still maybe just 10% losses makes sense. I mean each shock army alone is throwing 75-100k men into this battle...so your talking at a minimum the battle involved almost half a million Soviet troops from various fronts/armies. Against this I was facing a total 30+ German divisions again about half a million men....and then for each side to only lose like a weak division or so each turn......Realistic it isnt.

The fight goes on, but it is extremely frustrating to watch Soviet units wiped from the board turn after turn due to encirclement being the only way in the game to get real losses and then when the Soviets can organize a successful counteroffensive it does basically no damage to the German war effort other than a slight delay in the time table of their next encirclement. If the Germans had it so easy in the real war they would have won. Look at operation winter garden for the relief of stalingrad were those German divisions encircled...nope but by the end of the operation they were all practically combat ineffective from the losses they took trying to break through, and that wasnt a very long operation by WiTE game terms-----in real life divisions could and did suffer massive losses in normal combat operations not just encirclement operations. 1 week is more than enough time to destroy pretty much any division in WW2 combat especially on the eastern front. Simple fact is most divisions didnt attack/get attacked every week- corps took time to plan operations gather supplies and then launch the assault. Then if it wasnt as super success/breakthrough you had to replace all the dead wounded- rebuild the division in the line or be pulled out to rebuild before you could try it again. A failed attack by a division in WW2 was a bad thing typically as Armys have policies and when you are ordered to do something you do it- believe US standard is 20% losses is acceptable to accomplish a mission.....so if an attack fails you should figure the unit had better have suffered 20%+ losses in men/equipment otherwise the General is probably getting fired for not trying hard enough. An Generals usually dont like to get fired, they like their pension plans lol.

Again I think some people lack the concept of what this scale of game is. Its divisional/corps level operations- when a division/corps is defeated in combat its not a bad day of combat its a bad week of combat, I still say from watching the combat reports some that combat model is only representing a couple hours to a day of actual combat and that is inherently the issue with the system. The turns are 1 week turns not one day turns.

A WW2 division locked in heavy combat can easily lose a battalion or more in men per day of assault/defensive operations. Even Allied- US/English divisions had this happen. There are numerous instances of entire battalions/regiments ceasing to exist in 1 day of heavy combat. WW2 combat is an extremely lethal battlefield, more lethal than even modern operations for the most part because its full kinetic operations every single day. You want real war casualties I think you will have to double or triple the combat losses in the current game for germans and then probably double that again for early war Soviets. Of course if you make Soviet losses realistic u then also have to add in the 2M missing men from their OOB.

Almost every single US division locked in combat for a year or close to it suffered 100%+ losses over that time frame- and US units typically lost many fewer men than Soviet/German units. That should give a frame for how heavy losses should be on the eastern front.

Hey an this is all just my opinion lol. From seeing some screen of war in the west it looks like that combat model is way better than WiTE as I saw some reports of 100k losses for each side for 1 week of operations- thats how WiTE should be pretty much every week when alot of offensive operations are going on. I know German players might cry foul if a division lost like 5k men in one attack/defense but thats how the real war was. Its why all the panzers couldnt just join up in one spot to run over Soviets, German infantry divisions could and did get extremely chewed up holding the frontline.

Just a quick historical example I pulled from a very quick search to back up my points:

In Krasny-Bor, the Spanish casualties were 3,645 from a total of 5,608 men involved in the battle. In addition, the enemy held more than 300 Spanish prisoners. This was a battle lasting 48 hours, not even 1 week like in this game. WW2 was much more lethal than people on this forum seem to realize. Those spanish were in heavily fortified positions supporting AGN in wooded terrain effectively if I remember right. Also before people go ohh spanish not Germans- this division had a fairly exception combat record for its service with the Germans and was trained and equipped to German standards.

In real life Generals didnt get 5 hasty attacks to get a good roll and succeed- if they failed the first time alot of their men probably died, which then made additional attacks less likely, not more likely to succeed.

Less whining and bitching would be more helpful.

All things being equal the game is balanced as you and BrianG are doing just fine and Dave going to get a draw dispite loses that were far worse then historical

This is a game not a book and balance should be based on equal player skills and the data from those games.

I still believe Russia is way over powered from 43-45.

Anything that nerfs Germany in 41 or 42 will put the game back to run away Russian offensives in summer of 42 that was a complete disaster. 85% of the strong following 2by3 had left and that was what killed WitW before release.

Players do not want Russia in Berlin in summer of 44 and a general across the front offensive in 42.

Look at the data of the games where the players are of equal skills and don't keep cherry picking historical.

You lost a few divsions its not the end of the world.

The casualties problem doesn't just affect germans but the soviets as well, and is part of what makes germany collapse too quickly late war (and part of what led to those 42 soviet offensives). WiTE is currently too reliant on pockets to produce losses which means the side on the offensive generally doesn't get worn down much at all.

[chaos45]

IDK I feel my "bitching and whining" has all been over one issue- lack of combat attrition/casualties- this is for both sides.

I dont expect my Cav corps/tank corps/infantry units to walk away from blunting a German offensive in great shape either lol. What I would expect is the Germans get a bloody nose/reduce their cutting edge units with casualties and my counterattack forces also get a bloody nose from attacking German Armor thats what I would expect.

A full on confrontation between 2 Army groups over a major city should easily result in 50k+ losses per week. If one army group just ran away and did a delaying action could understand only 10-15k losses a week but not for a full on offensive/counter-offensive by forces of that scale.

Will concurr on the casualty issue mainly benefiting the side on the attack, which is why its a huge bonus for Germany in 41/42 but then in 43+ it turns into a huge bonus for the Soviets. That goes along with my other stated issue of to many things baked into the system auto giving advantages to make things work.

As I have said before it does seem we have a roughly historical match going on territory wise- loss wise we are both lower than historical but thats the combat engine.

Also just an aside but if Germany can win the war by the winter of 1941 why shouldn't the Soviets be able to do better than historical and win in 1944? just a thought. IDK about winning in the summer of 1944 but for sure in all realism the Soviets if they had been more aggressive and managed their forces/priorities slightly different might have been able to take Berlin in the winter of 1944 esp since all the German reserves were stupidly being committed to the Bulge.

I'll make further comments on our game as we get ahead of the turns we are in, as I have my thoughts on how operations were conducted by both sides as well.

[M60A3TTS]

Don't worry about the "bitching and whining." I recall someone making a lot of noise on the forum about getting rid of middle earth rules. But maybe that was considered "constructive criticism".